Blog

As indicated before, death is not something that only affects the victim, but also other members. It affects the whole society, especially when it occurs in unconventional means, such as euthanasia (Goodman, 2006). It affects the psychological and emotional status of the individuals with whom the victim had relations. For this reason, the deontologist argues that the society has the right to be involved in such issues (Kamm, 2004). In his contribution, Emanuel Kant, indicated that what one does must be done within the confines of the law (Goodman, 2006). In fact, he indicated that if the acts are considered good, then they should be regulated by the international laws. This means that the acts must be generally acceptable across the globe. However, the fact that euthanasia attracts a lot of opposition from a majority of the society members globally means that it is not a ‘good’ thing. It is imposed, and denies the society members their rights to make their contributions regarding the death of individuals (Kamm, 2004). On the contrary, the consequentialists do not believe the society has a right to decide the right to live of a terminally ill person. As said before, their main belief is that life is a personal and private affair, meaning that it can only be controlled by an individual. This is a liberal point of view, which states that a person has the right to live and also to die. The society has no right to interfere with the decisions that have been made by an individual concerning their wish to terminate their lives.

For this reason, the consequentialists are in support of the physically assisted death. They belief that by doing so, they will be respecting the right to die of the individuals (Kamm, 2004). On the contrary, the deontologists belief that the right to live or die is not a decision that an individual, legislations or any groups of people can make. They believe that the two are determined by God. They therefore use the religious perspective of life, which states that it is controlled by God. According to them, physically assisted deaths are morally wrong, and against the values of religion. They therefore condemn the act, stating that it is good to let the person be, and probably he/she may get well. The bottom line is that both the deontologists and consequentialists believe that people have universal rights.

The government is thus is not engaging in mere propaganda. It is facing realistic adverse effects arising from global warming. The government faces urgent need to take immediate steps with the intent of reducing the emissions of global warming. There are beneficial technologies and practical solutions that substantially reduce carbon emissions. In establishing the U.S. as one of the clean energy economies and a global innovation leader, militating against the adverse effects of global warming is paramount for any government. It is time government leaders took actions by fighting misinformation aggressively with the intention of reducing individual carbon emissions. This will ensure that communities and cities are prepared for the imminent climate change (Arnold & Caple, 2009).

This newspaper looks for to spell out climate change and illustrates the major results human being hobbies on global warming. It goes farther to mention the effect of global warming and concluding because of the procedures for curbing climate change triggered by such type of man hobbies.

As indicated before, the consequentialists believe that the right to live is a private issue that should not concern other people (Darwall, 2005). The decision to live should therefore come from an individual and not the family members. This means that in the case of physically assisted death, while the family members may be notified, they do not have the final say concerning the lives of their loved ones. For this reason, the rights of the parents or family members to make any decisions are not respected. On the other hand, life is not a private affair for the deontologists. An individual is attached to the family members, friends and the community through relations (Darwall, 2004). When one dies, it becomes a loss, not only to him, but to the whole community members. This means that, while the deontologists do not support the physically assisted deaths, the wishes of the family members supersede that of an individual (Goodman, 2006). Thus, a doctor and an individual cannot just agree by themselves to end life, without the consent of the parents and other family members. Their rights are respected.

Overloading the atmosphere with high levels of carbon dioxide traps heat to drives the Earth’s temperature. Burning fossils fuels like oil, coal, and natural gas and forest loss because of deforestation. This is especially so within the tropics. Most climate scientists contend that global warming is a realistic issue and is happening. Human activities are the chief cause for global warming. This wide-ranging consensus is supported by all-embracing scientific evidence.

This old fashioned paper looks for to specify climate change and illustrates the foremost outcomes of man fun-based activities on global warming. It is going deeper to cover the results of climate change and ending aided by the strategies for curbing global warming as a result of these sort of our fun-based activities.

Future climatic change as well as related effects varies from region-to-region across the world. The impact of global temperature increase includes sea level rises, subtropical deserts’ probable expansion, and change in pattern and amount of precipitation. While warming will be strongest in Arctic coupled with continuing glaciers retreat, sea ice, and permafrost, there are other likely global warming effects such as extreme weather conditions like ocean acidification, heavy rainfall, heat waves, droughts, as well as species extinctions because of changing temperature. These adverse effects of global warming provide sufficient that government efforts in tightening environmental regulations are not anchored on cheap propaganda but on realistic issues that deserve urgent redress. To human beings, there are food security threats arising from low crop yields as well as habitat loss from inundation. For these reasons, governments ought to implement policy responses towards global warming.

Scientific comprehension of global warming causes has been on the rise. All chief industrialized nations including the U.S. acknowledge that human activities produce greenhouse gases that culminate to greenhouse gases. The largest drivers of global warming are emissions of carbon dioxide from combustion of fossil fuels, changes in land use like deforestation, and cement production (Ward, 2007). Indeed, human influence in ocean and atmosphere warming, in global water cycles, in reductions of ice and snow, in global average sea level increases, as well as climate extreme changes. The U.S. government realizes that human influence is a dominant cause for global warming. This has been especially so in the mid-20th century. Thus, it is important for the government to tighten environmental regulation rules.